Ebanks v. Brown
- Jesse Furman
- 1:25-cv-01181
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ebanks v. Brown, Judge Furman gave defendants one final chance to correct their removal notice or face remand.
The defendants must provide the required citizenship allegations and serve the order. The action may be returned to the Supreme Court of New York, County of Bronx, if they cannot truthfully establish complete diversity of citizenship.
What happened
In Ebanks v. Brown, Ashley S. Ebanks sued Andre L. Brown and Perfect Timing Transport LLC. The defendants moved the case from state court to federal court, claiming federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship.
The court had already found problems with the defendants’ first removal notice and ordered them to file an amended notice. The amended notice corrected one problem but listed the defendants’ residences rather than their citizenships, which was not enough to establish the required complete diversity of citizenship.
Judge Furman ordered the defendants to file a second amended removal notice by February 26, 2025, stating their citizenship. He said the case will be sent back to the Supreme Court of New York, County of Bronx, without further notice if the defendants cannot truthfully establish complete diversity. He also ordered them to serve the plaintiff with the order and file proof of service.
The detailed version
- Ebanks v. Brown · No. 1:25-cv-01181
- Jesse Furman
- Feb. 19, 2025
Background
Ashley S. Ebanks is the plaintiff. Andre L. Brown and Perfect Timing Transport LLC are the defendants. The defendants filed a notice removing the action from state court to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. They invoked federal subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c), the statute governing removal of certain cases containing federal claims.
On February 13, 2025, the court identified deficiencies in the original notice of removal and ordered the defendants to file an amended notice by February 20. The defendants filed an amended notice on February 18.
Issue
The amended notice corrected one deficiency but alleged only the defendants’ residency, not their citizenship. The court explained that residency is insufficient to establish citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. The court therefore required the defendants to provide a truthful allegation of complete diversity of citizenship, meaning that the citizenship requirements for federal diversity jurisdiction must be satisfied for all relevant parties.
Ruling and next steps
The court ordered the defendants to file a second amended notice of removal alleging their citizenship by February 26, 2025. The court stated that, if the defendants could not truthfully amend the notice to allege complete diversity of citizenship, the action would be remanded—sent back—to the Supreme Court of New York, County of Bronx, without further notice to either party.
The court also directed the defendants to serve the plaintiff with a copy of the order within two business days and file proof of service on the docket. The order did not itself remand the action; it gave the defendants one additional opportunity to correct the removal notice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.